The Japanese Camera & Imaging Products Association (CIPA) has published a new graph showing the number of cameras shipped in February 2019 and the figures aren't reassuring. According to the association, sales were down from January 2019 and had substantially decreased compared with February 2018.

Global digital camera shipments in February 2019 came in at only 935,148 units compared to the 1,001,398 shipped in January 2019. This is a more than 30% decrease year-over-year, with January 2018 having seen 1,340,492 shipments and February 2018 having maintained a consistent rate at 1,340,995.

A decrease was experienced in the interchangeable lens camera market as well, dropping from 798,014 in February 2018 to 521,217 in February 2019. Both the February 2018 and 2019 shipment periods were lower than February 2017, which had 843,217 in global interchangeable lens camera shipments.

A similar, though not quite as dramatic, decrease in global built-in lens digital camera shipments was experienced in February 2019 compared to February 2018 at 413,931 units versus 542,981.

According to the CIPA data, global digital camera shipments remained very similar from January to February 2017 and increased slightly for those same months in 2018. The trend changed in 2019, with overall February shipments dipping a little more than 6% below January's global shipment numbers.

The numbers are concerning due to the general decrease year-over-year, but also because the shipment numbers decreased during a time in the year when they previously remained relatively steady or began increasing. It's yet to be seen whether March's figures represent yet another decrease or if February's shipment numbers end up being an unfortunate, concerning fluke.

Comments

We all know smartphones killed point and shoot camera segment....but I would at least think it also brings interest to the world of photography. Enthusiasts who are looking to advance their skillset would want to upgrade to a real camera. Also, there is more professional photographer than ever before. I am kinda surprised camera sales declined.

Fixed-lens, cheap cameras have always outsold ILCs by a wide margin. The difference in the film days was that their print quality, even for 4x6 size, was really poor. Today’s cell phone cameras with computational power provide the same quality that only really good 35mm film cameras did, and you don’t have to remember to bring them with you.

I am not at all surprised that dedicated camera sales are declining. I think the only hope is to make it easier and easier to get really high quality from dedicated cameras, which means ore automation and better AI features IN ADDITION TO the manual features we “serious photographers” appreciate.

@thoughts Nah, most young people have money and energy to burn while they work out what's life. You're forgetting the impact of self publishing. You haven't considered how we all try to out do each other when we make stuff. When the stars all line up it'll be a perfect storm for camera makers as long as they're good to capitalise on it. The education isn't quite there yet I think, but it'll get there sooner rather than later. If people still have interest in large format cameras, I really doubt the enjoyment of taking a photo will be forgotten any time soon

@Thoughts is right. I have some 12-14 year-old family members addicted to Instagram and other social media. They upload tons of pictures and for them their iPhones are everything they need. They don’t care about analogue gear or dslrs, they love cellphone photography. Oh and they have far more followers than me lol.

@ze 11 year olds are restricted in purchasing power and exposure to cameras. But I'd say just as restricted and exposed to cameras as we were when it was all film. When they get a little older and curiosity takes a hold and they have their own bank account I'd say there's more chance of them getting something better than 30 years ago

Canon and Nikon got lazy and soft, they assumed they could roll out a camera every 2 years with minimal updates, and people would buy it. Which worked well until smartphones appeared. Then it stopped working but Canon/Nikon carried on as if nothing had happened. If the cameras can't send an image to facebook then why would consumers buy it? Computational photography is the future for many branches of photography. The future for camera companies is to cater to enthusiasts/pros, and I think we'll lose a company or two along the way. Why we don't see Nikon and Canon lenses in cameras shows where they went wrong. Maybe we'll see some real innovation that consumers (not enthusiasts) will buy into, but I'm not sure what that device will be. None of my friends, most of whom have children, have a camera and I don't see that changing.

There is nothing Canon or Nikon or any camera company could have done to compete against smartphones. With the advent of the iPhone, the modern day smartphone has become the necessary technology tool for everyone.

It's always with you, easy to carry and use, you can easily edit and share your images with it, it's always connected to the internet. No camera will be easier to carry than a smartphone, because the smartphone will always be with the person anyway. No camera can always be connected since very few will pay a cell phone bill for their camera.

We have seen some of the most amazing cameras and lenses this past decade, but the smartphone has still taken over.

It's amazing that these tired fallacies continue to persist. Canikon could have made Facebook co-branded cameras and the end result would have been the same. People who think it's about connectivity don't understand smartphone users.

Canon and Nikon are just too stodgy, too shortsighted, too conservative, too reluctant, too slow to react. They remind me of Kodak, so desperate to protect their old ways, their old business, unwilling to adapt to a new world until it was too late. Look at Fujifilm, who rapidly embraced change and flourished. I recommend people read:https://www.amazon.com/Innovating-Out-Crisis-Fujifilm-Vanishing/dp/1611720230I think the leaders of Sony must have read this book.

There's also less reason to buy new bodies now that the megapixel race is over [for most]. Nikon went from 2.7 meg to 6 meg to 10 meg, then 12, then 16 - entry level cameras have been at 24meg for several years and don't need to increase.I will only buy a new body if there is a huge increase in iso performance now.

It's no longer about megapixels. It's now about other factors, like face/eye AF tracking capabilities, frame rates, IBIS, silent shooting, etc. I stopped worrying about megapixels a LONG time ago. I've been wanting better AI in autofocus, faster frames rates, quieter shooting, IBIS, and these things all continue to be things I would buy a new camera for. One of these days, a new generation of mirrorless cameras will have global electronic shutters that totally eliminate the need for any mechanical shutter, eliminate any hint of rolling shutter, and will allow extremely fast flash sync speeds. That will be another reason to buy a new body.

T3 - I agree, or at least I hope, that the megapixel race is over. Personally for my style and genre of photography I find 30MP to be the lower limit, and 50 to be a little too much, due to high ISO noise and RAW file sizes. So 40MP strikes a good balance for me.

The new "standard" for hi-res cameras seems to be about 45MP, and such cameras already have excellent DR, good high ISO and fast enough fps.

Silent shooting would be very nice, but I'm not interested in video and I don't need global shutters. I can get high flash sync already using HSS on my Canon flashguns, and with enough light output for close-up and macro. YMMV.

I'll buy a new body when I can find one that better meets my needs and accepts my Canon glass with zero compatibility issues. But I could happily continue with 5DS, 5DMkiv and Canon glass for another 10 years, as long as the gear is economic to maintain and repair if something breaks (no sign of problems yet and 160,000 actuations on the 5DS).

My Sony A7Rii with all its flaws is probably the last camera I will ever need. Photography is my hobby so I can’t spend tons of money in lenses or upgrade every generation, but I use my iPhone way more often to take pics because it is always with me. That device will keep upgrading for sure.

You still see very often in all kind reviews etc professional reviewers talking about Mpix values how higher is better or just down talking about the smaller ones by attitude. Same thing goes here in various comments etc.

Sure the Mpix counter is not at all same as it use to be, but it is still there, if not then at least some kind a "foot note" attitude.

It is more about sensor sizes now, the automatic object tracking and automatic focusing to wanted thing like a person eye from 50 meters when the DOF is already 20 meters etc. All kind gimmick reasons and comparisons.

But when it comes to Mpix, it is things like 24 is better than 20 and 36 is now anymore enough like 42 or 45 and then of course 50 or more doesn't offer so much benefits etc.

All kind things that really didn't anymore matter since 8-10 Mpix. But here and there people claim how they can see the 36 Mpix difference compared to 16 Mpix even if through 1280 x 720 display...

I think before digital there were a limited number of serious photographers buying SLR's. Then when digital cameras started up many of us who gave up in the film days went back to photography. A lot more people who didn't shoot film because it was too expensive and burdensome to process bought cameras. Then phones started taking 'good enough for the majority' pictures - possibly we are evolving back to the same percentage of "serious photographers" buying DSLR's as we had those buying SLRs in the film days. Also there are so many good used cameras these days why buy new unless you're a pro?

I've spent my share on camera gear over the years and like others here have started asking "what can this new latest, greatest, bestest, 'NiKanon' do that my gear can't?"I'm not a pro and shoot for my own enjoyment nothing else. Looking through my gear I see a full collection from 7D, 7D MK II, 80D, 5D MK III, M5, RP and more lenses than I can name at this sitting - from a tilt shift, various zooms and primes all the way to a 500 F4 the field is covered for me I think. Oh if I let my G.A.S. run away there's a spot or two that might be empty but as I enter retirement it's time for me to hone my eye while I can rather than chase after a never to be achieved BEST EVER.

I agree with Photomonkey I sense the same storm clouds on the horizon in the local restaurants and the reducds average ticket in our own business. Could it be that others are feeling a pinch somewhere in the family pocketbook?

DSLRs are falling in production and shipments (Dec-Dec 66%), keeping the same product mix. Not good at all.

MILCs are selling in slightly smaller numbers but at higher prices that compensate. Mix skews to higher priced models (Dec-Jan-Feb). Dec-Dec for example, for MILCs is 118% in units and 169% in value. Not bad at all.

Now it is time to go and buy the latest and best DSLR if wanted to have something with them for next decade. So get the D850, D5 and 5D IV, 1D X II and be happy with everything there is for next 10 years with lenses for those.

The devil's in the details, of which, unfortunately, CIPA provides too few.

ILC camera shipments for Feb were down 35% by volume on Feb last year.Lens shipments for Feb were down 25% by volume on Feb last year.

But MILC shipments for Feb were down only 4% by volume on Feb last year, and were actually up 3% by value.And Lens shipments for FF and FF+ sensors were down in Feb by only 4% on Feb last year, and were actually up by 12% in value.

So there's an obvious tilt towards mirrorless and FF, as you'd expect. However, while CIPA breaks lens shipments down by sensor size, it doesn't do the same for camera bodies, so it's not possible to glean from the stats what effect all the new FF MILC entries are having on the overall size of that market segment.

Exactly, it may not be as bad as it seems. One thing is sales of higher value cameras at smaller rate, other thing is dropping the basic cheap consumer models which make a lot of sales but not much profit.

"DSLRs will be around for a very long time". yes, but not in noticable [sales] numbers. LOL

slappers totally faltering. Fully in line with my expectations. Mirrorfree passing DSLRs at full speed now. 2019 FY might turn out 2/3 mirrorfree and only 1/3 slappers already. Both in units and even more so in value (yen).

As I always said: the problem was entirely "supply side", not lack of demand. Now that we finally have decent and also some affordable mirrorfree cameras for both APS-C and FF image area, things will happen really fast. Like the switch from Vinyl to CDs to downloads to streaming.

DSLR vs MILC is hardly like downloads vs streaming. It's more like Apple Music vs Spotify.

Don't forget that DSLRs can get pretty much anything MILCs can get, but the converse is not true. If for example Nikon puts the Z6 sensor + IBIS in the D760 the only advantage the Z6 would have is the EVF and smaller size. DSLRs also have much more glass and use said glass better than MILCs. They are also getting dirt cheap. So it's not so cut and dry.

I use MILCs but I don't understand the celebration of less choice in the marketplace. More competition makes all cameras better. If the standard of DSLRs didn't exist MILCs would have stagnated long ago.

Because the presence of a mirror in a camera has become religion, and the apostates must be smited as the prophecy foretold. God won't accept anything less than annihilation through aggressive internet trolling.

i am so gleeful about mirrorslapper armaggedon, because Canon and Nikon refused to give me a choice of decent mirrorfree cameras for so long. now, finally i can get what i want and watch as they struggle. hope it breaks Nikon's neck. Canon at least gave me the M50, so the angel of death might spare them, this time. :-)

- Uncertainty in Canikon's MILCs, due to lack of lenses and unexciting features.

- Unreasonable prices and lack lustre in the new M43 models.

- The trend set by Huawei's periscope camera, and there will be others soon.

I believe Sony and Fuji are doing much better than these reported figures indicate, as they provide better performance/price

What we see now can be the beginning of a big change. Camera makers should invest and make compact cameras that are similar to larger versions of the camera inside the Huawei phone. Thicker, more ergonomic, smart-cameras with larger lenses and better controls than the phone.

"The trend set by Huawei's periscope camera, and there will be others soon."

Slow darker and next to useless is now a positive trend?

Much more of an influence on the sales of digital ILCs:

Between the years 2004 and 2006, Canikon releases a number of excellent budget DSLRs. And many buy them as their first serious digital. For low ISO and non-sports events those are still excellent stills cameras in 2019.

2009/10 world economy (except China crashes).

By 2012, some people again have jobs, not so much ones that pay as well, and then 2012-15: Sony, Nikon, Canon, Samsung, Olympus, Panasonic all release ILCs that are inexpensive and improvements upon those 2006 Canikon bodies. So those sell in quantity, as either second digital ILCs, or as first ILCs.

I posit it very unlikely that that the majority units sold (lenses or bodies) comes from the bleeding edge top of the line. So that's Sony selling more A6300s than A7RIIIs, Olympus selling more EM10IIIs than EM1IIs, etc.

If you're stuck in an airport, see how old the cameras are that people are using. It's a different world. Ironically, many Japanese, who tend to be thrifty, have old but "good" digital cameras like D700 or 5D. As others have pointed out, cameras are good enough and "upgrades" often entail buying new lenses, cards, hard drives, faster computers. Like buying a computer, the first box is only the first purchase.

For some, it will always be about the camera, in the same way stereo was about the receiver. But to get more people to spend money on stuff they don't really need, new cameras will need to make it possible to do something you cannot do with your existing camera.

I wouldn't consider Japanese photographers to be thrifty. Tokyo camera stores are full of cheap yet almost unused recent cameras, indicating that they rarely keep their cameras more than a few months. Or so I've been told by friends who visit Japan frequently.

This is why Canon/Nikon have come out with only Full Frame in MirrorlessDigital has been Bad for the Camera Companies. In the first few years of digital, camera models were changing every 6 to 12 months, the camera companies were use to models lasting 3 to 6 years! Digital Technology was changing so fast the first few years that 100's of thousands of compact cameras were junked or dumped in 3rd world countries as they were outdated before shipping.DPR has shown charts with 2300 new models from 1998 to 2017 & units went from 37 million film cameras in 1998 to 122 million digital cameras in 2010. No company could plan what to do. So why have Canon/Nikon come out with only FF in ML, to get back to the days of 20 to 30 million units a year of all camera types like they did from 1985 to 1999. Keep high end DX format SLR's but back off on the low end DX, this will make for steady production and the camera companies can go back to making modest profits as they did before digital.

I think Digital has been Good for the Camera Companies. In the days of film cameras, new model releases were less frequent, so people held on to cameras for a lot longer. For example, the Nikon F2 was introduced in 1971. The F3 was introduced in 1980.I think we are slowly starting to see a reversion to the norm, as incremental enhancements to sensor technology are becoming less significant.

@Alex Permit; Digital has been a Disaster for the Camera Companies. 2300 New Models in 20 Years, do you think the service depts have parts for all of them! Technology was changing so fast that there was little time for product testing as Testing = Time = Outdated & you wanted to get that newest feature 1st, even if you had to switch brands, again, right. During the 1st few years, 100's of thousands of digital cameras were junked as they were outdated before shipping.It was a win for you as cameras were sold near cost or below just to get rid of them as replacements were already on the way.The camera co. use to make film handling, mechanical cameras; digital was mostly electronic, so they had to get parts from the electronic companies instead of making their own stuff.The camera co. expected Film Camera Sales to continue & live alongside Digital, 70 to 80% Film to 20 to 30% Digital as Digital was going to be too expensive for most & film too entrenched in society.

As a small business person on the ground, I have been seeing signs of a weakening economy for the last three months. Economic indicators of all sorts are starting to shift negative but they lag the real world by about two months. Meanwhile we have economic "cheerleaders" smiling and telling us "things are great!" as they edge towards the exits.Fact is that people in this economy have pretty much bought all the toys they are going buy. I see evidence of wallets snapping shut every day. And gas prices are going up. In '08 when that happened it was the straw that broke the back of the Bush bubble.

Yeah I see this too. Even though everyone else is like "Yeah the [US] economy is doing great..."

Ever since the "recession" of 2008-2010, I think people have been more careful of their disposable income, even though the average family household probably still doesn't have an adequate emergency fund saved up.

Obviously, there is more at work here too, shifts in trends, etc. As was mentioned above, DSLRs sales may have influenced these numbers a bit too, I'd be curious to go back further, say, 10 years, and see what the trend was, to see if there is a larger cycle going on that spans more than 3 years (I'm sure someone has done this already).

I think you are talking about just one country that represents less than 5% of the world's population. Yes it is the world's largest economy but hot on its heals is China with a population 4 times as large. I think it's China's rapidly growing middle class that the camera manufacturers have their eyes on. If China takes a liking to a certain style of camera then that's what it will be and you can forget the rest. Posturing has already begun. A few high-end professional cameras will remain of course but these will be largely out of reach of the enthusiast.

@AlanG, yes but a ton of other things were happening globally that set the stage. Commodity prices were through the roof because of global demand and the general global frothiness. In the US, years of deficit spending and the insane mortgage backed securities market put us in a bubble. Consumers were leveraged to their eyeballs and thus the increment of gas price increase was enough to stop them from discretionary spending which, in turn, caused cascading layoffs throughout the economy which then collapsed the mortgage market as laid off workers stopped paying mortgages.@BobT3218, You are correct about China driving the new iteration of the camera market but at the moment they too are in a funk.

Looking at that figures for the months of January and February over 2017-2019, we're seeing year-on-year falls in sales of 25-30%.

It's little wonder manufacturers have given up investing R&D in the lower/mid end of the market and releasing such lame updates to their cameras at ever increasing prices. This really hit home for me with Panasonic and their recent LX100 II and FZ1000 II. It's clear they aren't even trying.

When I see the advances being made in smartphones, it makes me want to go full smartphone for my photography. The only problem is I need a long zoom for my son's sport, so reluctantly I'm still in the market for a genuine camera as my RX10 (original) isn't long enough. But the way the market is now with lame updates at ever increasing, it's hard to find anything I really want to buy.

A number of the 'superzoom' cameras are just that, sensor tech very similar to high end smartphones married to glass that actually does something. The results are quite good, and you don't need extra lenses.

Now that all cameras are becoming more and more "equal", it will be interesting to see what new tech unfolds to prompt new camera purchases.

If we got organic sensors I'd be really pleased, as images would lose that "digital" look, and noise patterns would be far less obvious.

AI technology is clearly going to be the next "big thing", with object recognition (OR). Much of the skill will be taken away from the photographer and handed over to the camera, but think of the possibilities:

Soon, OR will not just recognise the subject - it will also recognise the degree of *movement* in the subject, and set an appropriate shutter speed.

Soon also it will be able to automatically recognise a "fussy" background, and choose an aperture (or "fake bokeh" setting) to render it as a blur.

Soon it will "learn" how to crop poorly exposed images automatically in-camera, to improve composition.

Soon it will be able to recognise different subjects, label them and put them in different folders.

@gaul, What do you think the market wants? My guess: pocketable, or failing that, distinctly better and more flexible image making options than a pocketable camera, while still reasonably portable and affordable. (Only a small fraction care for the bulk or cost of cameras and lenses in the bulky 20th century film formats.)

When my youngsters or their friends look at my pics, they might like them, but find it so uncool to have to go to a PC to 'post-process' them.. They now take for a god given right that AI will enhance your pictures at the same second of shooting a pic...

Gesture - Not so much lazy as not having the technology yet to make major improvements. DSLRs have reached close to peak maturity and can't be developed much further. Mirrorless will soon all have object recognition and other AI technology, so they can still be developed further.

Enlarging the rear monitor sounds like a great idea in principle, but in practice it means either having a much larger camera, or using the entire camera-back as a touchscreen. I don't for one second believe that's what most people want - they'd rather have knobs, dials and physical buttons that provide tactile feedback and greater precision. If you want a big image for playback, just look at the EVF.

@gaul, most photos from an ILC do not need post-processing, if in-camera settings are chosen well and there are no extremes of DR or such to deal with. Maybe you are putting your youngsters off by your "perfectionist" approach to image making. (For the record, I shoot JPEG+RAW, but most of the JPEGs are ready to use, at least for showing to family and friends, so the raw files are backups for the hard cases, of if I want to do some special image transformation.)

At least in my suburban area, camera stores have almost completely disappeared. You can buy a camera at Best Buy, sometimes Walmart, but even the chains are carrying less (PC Richards used to have quite a bit, now nothing).

(Similarly there has been a complete disappearance of electronic stores. Not like Best Buy, but the kind of place where you could by circuit boards, components, test equipment, oscilloscopes etc. )

Agreed. You can get anything you need on the internet. My point is the local stores don't exist. This is a huge change, you can't walk into a store and compare products, see how they fit in your hand, talk to someone who (hopefully) knows something about them.

My 5D II still takes very fine pictures. In some cases, My 5DSR is better, but I have no issue using the 5D II. I like the M series because it is small and light and the lenses, albeit not numerous, are all very sharp. I just upgraded my M3 with an M5 from Canon refurb very reasonably, but would not have paid full price. The bottom line is that most ILCs from anywhere in the last decade take pretty darn good pictures, so if you take care of it, a camera is a lasting investment. When new cameras reliably shoot really good 4k video, there may be some replacement, but until then, what you have is so close to what you can buy that there is no point in upgrading. For a new wave of sales, we need to see real sensor improvements (think 16 bit conversion, global shutter, and organic or quantum dot sensing). The 8k push in Japan might inspire some of those things, but only time will tell.

Processing is also at a plateau and that hasn't helped. With EUV wafer processing hitting mainstream next year, we may see a real jump in processing power per watt at 7nm and 5nm, and that could bring some nice new capabilities to cameras.

But sensors use really quite old tech and the processors inside the cameras are also fairly old tech as at the shipment levels they are getting that's what makes sense. (The cost to just prototype a chip at bleeding-edge technology is mind-blowing.) Also the latest and greatest geometries have begun to have lifetime issues, dimensions being so small the "real World" just kills them after a while, and camera manufacturers probably want their products to last longer than your latest phone...P.S. for more Google the "Hot-electron effect" (aka "Hot carrier effect", due to some electrons having more energy than others) and the related "Short-channel effects".I have something from Intel on this, but suspect it might be NDA as I can't Google it, so I'll stop there.

Most improvements will come to phone size sensors first. It's FAR easier to apply new tech to a physically small sensor. As the manufacturers get more experience, they can migrate the tech to larger sizes, but by then new stuff is hitting the phones.

I expect the fixed lens ("point and shoot") non-phone market will fall below film era levels, but the interchangeable lens market might do better. It should all least do as well as "enthusiast to pro" level film gear, but probably losing much of the "entry level SLR body and one kit lens" market to phone-cameras.

Alas we may get great deals on cameras very briefly and then prices shoot up under WTO or whatever while they try to negotiate something not too much worse than the EU deal. No reason the Japanese won't get the best deal they can, and we don't have the clout to get a EU deal clone. Still I doubt the 30 min limit will reappear, just simple import duty. Although the WTO tariff on video cameras used to be 35%...

People are broke, almost everywhere. This is not limited to digital camera sales, it's homes, cars, boats, etc. Unfortunately, I don't see anything on the horizon that points to a tangible improvement.

Flashback - How does that compare with previous years? The economy as a whole is resilient, and employment levels are relatively high. Even Brexit uncertainty has had little impact on spending, and when the dreaded B eventually happens (whatever the outcome) the economy will improve because the spending public seeks stability above all else.

Last analysis I read in the Economist, they peg the uncertainty over Brexit alone costing the UK's economy about 500M pounds *per day* in lost growth since the vote, leaving the economy ~ 3% smaller than it would have been had "remain" won the day. 3% growth in a mature national economy is a big. freaking. deal. Only China posts bigger numbers.

The costs come from the substantial relocation of corporate / banking HQs that has already taken place and from manufacturers already deciding against future British factories and supply-chain uncertainty (e.g. Nissan pulling production out of the Sunderland plant last month, Honda reconsidering Swinden, etc.)

Were the UK to "crash" out of the EU without a specific customs agreement, adding two minutes to the inspection of each truck passing through check at Dover will create a traffic standstill *17 miles* long. (Most freight customs check take longer than two minutes.)

@snapa. I wish I could agree with you my friend, but I see the situation worsening with each and every passing day.

When you look at store closures, auto and college loan delinquencies, auto sales, etc., it all paints an ugly picture. The stock market is no longer a barometer of economic activity, it's going up as a result of companies buying back shares.

I hope you're correct. I would love to see things improve for everyone, irrespective of who's running the country.

falconeyes - Personally I think Brexit is a huge mistake that will cause short-term damage to the economies of all EU countries as well as the UK. After about 3-4 years things will slowly get back on track but the short-term disruption will be a problem for many.

What irritates me most is the way the Brexiteers have destroyed the friendship and trust between UK and EU. The EU was responsible for successfully updating major laws, e.g. health & safety and environmental protection, and the signs are that the environment in particular will suffer after Brexit.

I'm in favour of freedom of movement and I don't think restricting movement will make any difference to terrorism.

I don't regard Brexit as a fun experiment, I regard it as a very serious issue, and one that sadly has become extremely divisive here in the UK.

Mark Carr, you're not looking at the right data.Consumer spending has climbed consistently, aside from the adjustment in 2008 due to the market there. Yes, of course, inflation is in there as well, but consumer spending up, no matter how you look at it.

Store closures? Yup, Amazon is doing very well. And stores are suffering. Car sales, down slightly due to higher interest rates... Due to a stronger economy... Stock buyback is an extremely small part of the stock market rise... These things don't point to overall reduction in spending. They just don't.

Massive capital gains and saving+spending growth for a *few* people skew overall numbers into positive territory, but those averages entirely neglect the flat or declining lived reality of the economic majority in the West.

Amazon's growth is outstanding; meanwhile, huge swaths of consumers in the US and Europe never shop at Amazon. Or on-line at all. In the US in 2018, only 14.3% of total retail sales were on-line. I realize that's hard to believe if your lifestyle relies on Amazon and on-line services, but we're in a bubble.

On-line retail competition is only part of brick+mortar's decline. Demographics tell the broader story. A few people doing well are spending more and doing so on-line; people doing less well--a larger number--are spending less and tend to buy in person.

Mark Carr is right: a few people are doing VERY well--better than ever! Everybody else is in big trouble.

The sudden drop is probably also driven by the new mirrorless systems brought out by Canon and Nikon. Prospective buyers waiting for the next generation of mirrorless perhaps? Gives them a little time to see were they should put their money and wait for better featured cameras from their favored manufacturer?I'll bet we'll see a little surge start later this year.

Agreed. I think a *lot* of people are deliberately hanging on to their gear, waiting for the next generation of cameras from Nikon, Canon and Sony, before committing themselves to the potential considerable expense of switching brands.

Current cameras from Sony have poor ergonomics that put many people off the brand, while first generation FF mirrorless such as Canon EOS-R and RP, Nikon Z6 and Z7, are not sufficiently well specified to appeal to most current DSLR users.

The earlier days of digital from a casual consumer standpoint was quite impressive in terms of how the technology kept getting better. My first digital camera was some 2mp Kodak that was the size of something like a Sony A7 body. Then I went to the Canon elph series for compactness, then went to DSLRs for the IQ. I purchased that Kodak in 2002, and in 2013 I bought my first FF DSLR. Basically 10 years.

I agree with others that tech has stagnated a bit negating quick upgrades. That FF DSLR I purchased in 2013 was the Canon 6D, and Canon is essentially using the same level of sensor in their "new" RP. I'd say the Sony A7rii's sensor is still state of the art, and that camera was released almost 4 years ago.

I'm embarrassed to admit to have hoarded 6 bodies (mostly Sony), more lenses than i'd care to use (most are average primes and older zooms, none stellar), besides the 2 old PS's that i still enjoy for macros and quick shots.

Probably i could sell them all, except one Alpha 5/6K (5k for size, 6k for EVF) with 3-4 lenses... and a PS. Yet i never sold anything, just made gifts - and who'd want my old cameras and lenses, when even students today have very high expectations (spoiled by phones)...?

I own exactly 10-cameras, One P&S Nikon P7800 for travel, one Nikon D7000 converted IR, 3-Nikon V1 Cameras for hiking biking, One Nikon D7200 DX for wildlife, One D800E for serious work, One D200 for portraits and two Samsung NX3000's. There are not enough keys on the keyboard to start typing all the lenses I own

A big concern that I have is that the manufacturers will start to build in planned obsolescence features in the cameras (like Canon does in its printers) to compensate for the lack of need to upgrade. I would be very p***ed off to find out my 3000$ camera broke down after only 2 years. That in turn makes me even more reluctant to invest serious money in a new system. Sad development...

It's not just smartphones at play here, and it's not all doom & gloom. The camera sales boom of the late 90s and early 2000s was not sustainable, and we don't need to upgrade our cameras every year. Smartphone sales are falling for similar reasons (incremental upgrades.. high prices.. less need/desire to upgrade every year). Another unsustainable boom.

Most of the "prosumer" and "non-serious" camera users I know buy a camera about once every 4 years, get maybe two lenses for it, and are happy that way.

The "serious" and professional photographers I know upgrade about once every 3 years, and generally own somewhere between 4 and 8 lenses. They think long and hard before switching cameras, because they know how to use a camera properly and work within the limitations of their gear.

Some of the GAS-infected enthusiasts here on dpr probably buy a camera every year, and some of them run 3 or more brands simultaneously. But I get the impression that quite a few of them buy cameras purely for "bragging rights" and only occasionally take photographs with them.

Sure, there are plenty of people who buy Leicas as jewellery or collectables, but there are also plenty who use them to take photographs, and may even feel inspired to "try harder" to produce good photos, in order to justify an expensive purchase.

As for (good) wine, it's meant for drinking, and I enjoy every drop of it!

No matter how many units Zeiss will ship (or Leica and Hasselblad for that matter), it won't show up in the CIPA reports, because CIPA only collect shipment data from the Japanese camera and lens manufacturers. But let's face it, the Japanese manufacturers represent well over 90% of the global market, and I don't think the likely very expensive Zeiss ZX1 will change that.

Mariano... There are collectors for everything as there are for Leicas. Most people that go on about "snob appeal" have never used a Leica. Must be the snob appeal then that has made the price of used Leica stuff double in the last five years. And it must be that snob appeal again that makes Leica unable to keep up with the demand for its products. Leica appeals to people who know what they are doing and find that all the bells and whistles do is get in the way.I wish you good photography with whatever equipment you like to use.

1. No numbers yet on FF Mirrorless came out last quarter of last year. Enthusiasts & Pros are waiting for them to sort out the kinks and adapter issues. Shipments, of course, hardly a blip & bumps.2. No numbers on luxury collectible brand: Leica 3. No sales/shipment breakdown of formats: Medium, FF, APS-C, M4/3s4. No sales/shipment of lenses by formats: a] this would be a good indication if enthusiasts-&-pros are witholding their purchases to wait out the FF or for next iteration of adapter-less FF Mirrorless; b] If lens sales/shipment figures go up it means nobody cares about FF Mirrorless and/or they are not upgrading; c] if goes down there is a potential tsunami of FF Mirrorless acquisition)

*** 5. The numbers indicated the Law of Supply & Demand doesn't work in pricing in camera industry or they cranked up the price to recover loss of sales? ***

6. Built-in Lens see a drop, too. I see resilience of sales gyrating in a very narrow band compared to interchangeables despite an onslaught by smartphones.7. Smartphones is more expensive than built-in lens cameras. Get my drift.

Your point about supply and demand: I think that mostly applies if the reason for the low demand is that prices are too high. But if the market is shrinking, i.e. many former customers aren't interested in buying cameras anymore, then you won't increase sales much by lowering prices. Instead you increase prices to compensate for fewer units sold.

Yes there is doom and gloom in the digital camera market and smartphones continue to hurt sales but....."According to preliminary data from the International Data Corporation (IDC) Worldwide Quarterly Mobile Phone Tracker, smartphone vendors shipped a total of 375.4 million units during the fourth quarter of 2018 (4Q18), down 4.9% year over year and the fifth consecutive quarter of decline."

Several issues strike me as potential reasons for this decline:•Phones are getting better at photography, both in creating and editing.•There's diminishing return upon investing in more expensive camera equipment.•In the race for better resolution, interchangeable lens camera equipment has become excessively heavy and unwieldy.•Many new lens mounts were recently introduced, and enthusiasts are in a holding pattern.•The average adult person, overall (but especially in USA, at least), is less wealthy than the generation that preceded them. Placing photography into the realm of "those who can afford it" decreases the population of customers who would buy a new camera.•The used market is saturated with perfectly good cameras for sale at significantly depreciated market value.•Basic kits still do the job for most casual photographers not willing to spend beyond $500.•Manufacturers are bad at integrating their products with existing mobile technology, decreasing their appeal.

@justme - isn't it amazing how the canon fall from grace, with it's biggest market share that you keep harping about, contributed more to the overall decline than any other company... while sony predicted sales growth for 2019.

@MILC man: Isn't it amazing how Sony never discloses unit sales numbers for their interchangeable-lens cameras, because they don't want the embarrassment? Sony's former Imaging Product and Solutions division includes Digital Imaging Group, Professional Services and Solutions Group, Professional Products Group, Medical Group, and FeliCa Business Division, so it's impossible for an outsider to know how profitable their camera sales are.

Actually Sony Germany recently said Sony is predicting a decline in both sales and market share, especially in FF mirrorless.This makes sense too. Last year they had two big new releases (ok, A7Riii was end of 2017) and sales went up, but this year nothing as big is planned. And at the same time 3 new competitors arrived with at least 6 new bodies.

Digital cameras are becoming a mature technology, and therefore sales slow down. People upgrade to replace worn-out equipment, but not because of technical improvements. Remember when you upgraded to a new PC because new ones were faster? PC sales peaked in 2011. That decline has somewhat stabilized. Buyers replace PCs now when they stop working, not because they are too slow. The same trend will control camera sales.

I see some really nice photos on average person smart phones. The OEMs are doing a great job for pros and super-enthusiasts, but they don't understand how to simplify the interface while keeping outstanding, advanced imaging.

Not necessarily. PCs run on software, and some software won't run on old PCs. I just upgraded a Core2Duo rig to a Core i7 and it was very much needed as a lightroom user. I also added a 4K monitor which did show a performance drop on the new computer, which would have basically bricked my old computer (It crashed at least once per hour while editing 24mp D750 files on a 1680 x 1050 monitor). Same goes for smart phones. They don't make 16gb smart phones anymore because they can't put the OS on and still have enough room for apps or photos/videos.

If cameras had enough power to run the better firmware the new ones use, they could add it in an update. That's why some cameras get updates while old ones don't, they can't handle the new firmware.

PeterAustin, I think your justification misses the much bigger factor. If I look at myself as an example, I used to have a pocket camera to go along with my ILC camera. The ILC I upgraded ~every 5 years. The Pocket, every ~3 years.... I haven't upgraded the pocket camera in the last 8, and I probably haven't picked it up in the last 5. The cell phones have replaced the pocket camera.

For me, I still love and can't do without my full-frame ILC... But for many others, the cell phone is just fine.. And this is clearly the bulk of the problem facing the camera industry. I would suggest the technology, especially with the mirrorless revolution really taking hold now is far from mature.

The OEMS needed to come up with much simpler (yet higher quality) for the "camera after a smartphone."

It's not difficult to understand the appeal of smartphone cameras besides that one always has it with them. The phone companies are obviously pouring lots of money and effort into these cameras and most reviews I see online spend a good deal of time on the photography aspects of a phone. Call quality is almost an afterthought.

Overall, these developments have been great. Folks everywhere are taking and enjoying more photos and videos than ever, and many of them are excellent quality, not to mention the citizen journalism being done with them.

There are also amazing photo editing apps for smartphones. Not just silly filters but programs with curves, highlight recovery, shadow recovery, etc.

I suspect there would have been an initial wave of people switching to digital from film and buying new cameras. The early digital cameras were not that great, and people upgraded. Now, digital cameras have been darn good over the recent years and for most of us there is no reason to keep upgrading.

Well the new lens mounts will certainly make people sit on the fence for a while to see how it all pans out. And wisely so.I mean if I were considering to buy my first camera and lenses today, I would certainly want to wait a while, to see who comes out the best, and think twice before buying the first version of any completely new system...

And yet these moronic manufacturers keep releasing new ML cameras almost daily, with prices pushing four grand for the body alone. They seriously need to rethink their strategy. I have a D850 with various lenses, but my main one is an excellent 500mm for wildlife. No need for a new camera for a long, long time. All I can say to Canon, Nikon, Sony, etc. is: good luck, guys. Almost everyone uses a cell phone nowadays. Sad, but true.

Some here say buy a $3000 camera with the best C-AF and $1000 lens so you can get a picture of little Johnny running around or the dog running in circles. Meanwhile, everyone with the latest galaxy or iPhones is saying, why? They don't have noticeable problems getting those pictures and they can apply cool filters and post the pictures instantly. And the response is, those pictures are not as good as the ones I took last week that I still have to process. My bet is most people here won't get it, which is kind of funny.

I agree, I'd quite like to have a "better" camera than my Canon 5DS and 5DMkiv, and I've looked at D850, a7Riii, S1R etc, but frankly the difference in performance. specs and image quality just isn't that significant.

It's the DSLRs that pull the numbers down worldwide, mirrorless market compared to February last year is 96.1% in units and 103.4% value. DSLRs are at 51.8% units and 50.7% value. Of course they will release more mirrorless cameras.

People use to laugh at the phrase "good enough". But the truth is modern smartphones and action cameras are "good enough" for just about everyone. (and that "just about everyone" is growing) For video it is even worse. Why pay $2000 for a camera that can barely shoot 4K 30p, when your phone and GoPro shoot smooth 4K 60p? And then, and this is 100% true for the majority, why waste time taking a picture and waiting to get home to process it, when with a phone you can post it (after using AI to get the best image) instantly?

Don't expect things to change and a miracle to happen. More expensive cameras and larger sensors aren't going to change things. Everyone is now fighting for a shrinking niche. Samsung is probably having a good laugh....while they are the largest maker of cameras.

I know no one - not even a “frequent wedder”, that buys a white stretch limmo for daily or frequent use in order to have it at hand for any upcoming wedding. So why by a “wedding camera” for daily use - or for travel use? Just asking...!

@Boss of SonyThank you for the examples, they are clearly shows the awful quality and the very ugly fake bokeh. And where are the moving dancing folks from the party in low light ? And where are the cinematic videos with a phone ?

Anulu... You're completely missing the point. In the 2000's, what percentage of ALL camera buyers were wedding photographers? A VERY small percentage. So many of those OTHER camera buyers simply do not need more than their phones to capture what they want to capture. Hence the shrinking market.

I don't even think Boss of Sony was trying to suggest wedding photographers will move to shooting weddings with cell phones.

Im not missing the point, im just saying is not good enough for everyone like they said above. Especialy in video. If Scoty Piper thinks video is just all about of frame rates, then he has absolutly no idea what is he talking about 🙂

Truly has NO CLUE what he is talking about. He is delusion and made up this idea that I "think video is just all about of frame rate".Sadly, companies like Sony use poor codecs, and low bit rates too. They don't have good color science either. There is much more to video, but some companies strip down what they offer and expect people to over pay for it.

Actually sony has one of the best color science, yes there are myths from haters but the color checker doesn't lie like f@nboys ;) : https://www.pdnonline.com/gear/cameras/the-best-cameras-for-color-reproduction-ranked/But we are talking here phones, you said is good enough for everyone. Now you say some companies doesn't give you good enough bitrate and good enough codec in cameras, so you think phones has better codec and bitrates than cameras ? There is a big contradiction between your sentences... so yes you have no clue what are you talking aboutWhat about details, depth of field, how do you put an nd filter to phone to get natural motion blur in bright light, long telephoto lenses etc etc...

Most people who take pictures don't care about DOF, ND Filters, natural motion blur, codecs, bitrates, etc... (Notice I DIDN'T say "Photographers". I said "people who take pictures".)

Cell phones will most likely never be enough for photographers.. However most of the previous camera buyers were NOT Photographers. They were simply "people who take pictures". Now, "People who take pictures" are perfectly happy with their cell phones for such pictures.

Anulu,That is is a great way to stop a delusional Sony fan boy. He quotes that poor ranking. That "ranking" is seriously flawed and considered by most to be a joke. They compared color charts, not skin tones or real world examples. LOL!!!Anyway, Sony is well know for having lousy colors, though they have improved slightly recently..

It is seen over and over again in history that once a product performance quality hits "good enough" then other factors like convenience and ease of use start to differentiate and predominate in consumer choice.

One example: The iPod was not the best sounding music player; mp3's were a compromise in terms of sound. But it was more than good enough and its other usability features became more important. And so all of those hifi brands became obsolete except in a small niche.

As a professional photographer for over 15 years, and one who has access to full frame Nikon cameras and the best lenses, 99% of my personal shots are taken with my phone. It will never replace my SLRs for paid work, but a phone is good enough for me on almost all occasions....and they're only getting better.

Anulu,You did good job of explaining the difference between Sony fans and real photographers. You are concerned about colors on color charts and color accuracy. Real photographers are more concerned with pleasing skin tones and complementary colors. Decades ago film makers like Kodak and Fujifilm realized accurate colors are not what photographers want, so they started producing different types of films with slightly different colors for different situations. Fujifilm and others have extended this to digital cameras.

@Scotty PiperLOL I live from photography and videography. You not, this is crystal clear from your comments...Still all the blind test result take Sony to the first place from real photographers, and you are much bigger Sony hater than i a f@nboy ;)

Anulu,Sorry, but your history here shows you are a flaming Sony Fan boy who makes stuff up when confronted with facts.The Sony forums are filled with threads about how to get Canon and Fuji colors because Sony's are so undesirable. Anyone can Google that see that you are delusional as usual. Are you next going to tell use that Sony has a camera that is really weather sealed? LOL! They have ZERO, as proven over and over.

As technology advances, we have less of a reason to have the latest and greatest Gear.Gone is the time, when we need to upgrade every year or two, or even more. I say, if it ain't broke, there's no need to replace it. I have many cameras that are several years old, that can still get the job done. I think that it's Good technique, over the best Gear that gets the job done, and I don't think I'm alone in that category.

Even for people that just want "good pictures" and have no interest in learning about photography, I was still recommending something like an RX100 as recently as 6 months ago. The low light and zoom reach would exceed that of a phone. After seeing what the Huawei P30 Pro has done though, I no longer in good conscience recommend any kind of separate digital camera to these types of people. And with how competitive the smartphone market is and the vast resources these companies have, iPhone and other Android phones will catch up with the P30, and all phones will continue to exceed that capability very quickly.

I sold my RX100ii around 4 months ago. My Mate 20 Pro is 'good enough' that I couldn't be bothered to drag around the Sony that while being small still isn't pocket-able. I still have my FF rig for when quality matters.

@Clint DunnWe have a Canon G9X we keep around cause it wouldn't be worth much selling it. Like you, I also have a FF camera I keep around, not only for quality but also ergonomics. I'm quite happy with the IQ from phones for casual snaps, but I still rather dislike the ergonomics and shooting experience and I'd imagine that will never change. But I don't dislike the ergonomics enough to carry around a separate pocket camera anymore.

I think amateur photographers always fell into two camps. Those who were technically minded and learned how to use and get the most out of a (perhaps completely manual) film camera, and those who just want to get the job done and have a photographic record of the events in their lives. The cell phone does very well for the later, and digital cameras have matured and an older camera does quite well for the former. No more “game changing” features to drive the replacement cycle.

I was about to write pretty much the same thing. Cameras now are so good, that the need or desire to upgrade is significantly lower than in the past. This is one of the drivers behind Nikon and Canon producing new lens mounts. By creating new mounts they have created a market for selling tens of thousands of new lenses. And lenses are far more profitable than camera bodies.

This is actually not supported by CIPA data. Annual lens shipments amount to something like 1.5 to 2 times more units than ILC cameras, but their total value is actually less than the total value for the camera bodies. This has been consistently true through the years.

Revenant - That surprises me, and it might be worth trying to read between the lines, particularly as the CIPA figures tend to disagree with statements often expressed by reviewers.

The majority of lenses sold are probably from third party brands, so lens revenue *across the industry* might well be less than camera revenue.

But as far as the likes of Canon, Nikon, Sony etc are concerned, their lenses will be considerably more expensive. So for camera manufacturers it may still be more profitable to sell lenses than bodies.

If you subtract the third-party lens manufacturers' contribution from the total value of lenses, you of course get an even lower number for the total value of the remaining lenses. So it's still true that the total revenue from lenses is smaller than that from the camera bodies. Excluding third-party manufacturers may raise the average value per lens, but in total the lenses still give a smaller revenue.

Agreed, I think there needs to be (and will be) some serious consolidation in the digital camera market. Some companies may need to drop certain sensors and accompanying mounts (Nikon dropping APS-C? Panasonic dropping m43? Canon abandoning EF-M?) or may exit the camera industry altogether like Samsung did.

Given how popular the GH5 is with film makers why would Panasonic drop m4/3?

Also, Nikon will sell many times more D5600 bodies that it wil sell Z7 or Z6 bodies. Same is true of the D3400. And those bodies, with any half decent lenses, will remain excellent stills cameras for years.

But back in the film era, or say 2014 to 20112 digital years, you couldn't mount Nikon lenses on a Canon. Or mount Sony A (Minolta) mount lens on a Nikon.

Most ILC camera sales, by volume not dollars, are a basic body and a kit zoom.

Now, absolutely, no one with say $25,000 in say Canon gear wants to just drop that (sans renumeration) for a bunch of Sony pro mirrorless gear.

The world's economy is not good, this includes China.

In the USA it's only been good to the likes of ibankers, their nannies, Google, and Amazon management for ten years. However a 5 year old DSLR is still an excellent stills camera if you've not abused it, so people hold on to those cameras unless there's a pressing need to switch.

@HowaboutRaw:I was just throwing that out there. But in light of what the shipment numbers are showing, it would be delusional to think all these companies can survive business as usual with all their product lines. There will be some form of consolidation, that's almost assured.

@HowaboutRaw:"Given how popular the GH5 is with film makers why would Panasonic drop m4/3?"Good question. But the fact that people are discussing the end of m4/3 is certainly not good for the sales of GH5.

Nikon might still sell more D5600 and D3500 than Z7 or Z6, but certainly not as many as during the last years anymore. New mirrorless options make them appear old. Even worse: Nikon does not have a new option in this price range.

Don’t worry there are plenty of ppl earning that kind of money here in London. Where a decent flat with fairly reasonable commute has hit anything between £750k-£1.2m...Cameras in UK are much more expensive e.g. Sony A7III £2k = 2620$ Thank God I am travelling to US 3-4 times a year. Most of my camera equipment purchases during the last three years were made across the pond.

Latest in-depth reviews

The Canon G5 X Mark II earns a Silver Award with its very good image quality, flexibility and the overall engaging experience of using the camera. However, if you need the very best in autofocus and video, other options may suit you better. Find out all the details in our full G5 X II review.

360 photos and video can be very useful for certain applications (as well as having fun). The Vuze+ is an affordable 360 camera that supports both 2D and 3D (stereo vision) capture, and might be the best option for someone wanting to experiment with the 360 format.

The Mikme Pocket is a portable wireless mic with particular appeal to smartphone users looking to up their game and improve the quality of recorded audio without the cost or complexity or traditional equipment.

The 90D is essentially the DSLR version of the EOS M6 Mark II mirrorless camera that was introduced alongside it. Like the M6 II, it features a 32MP sensor, Dual Pixel AF, fast burst shooting and 4K/30p video capture. It will be available mid-September.

Latest buying guides

If you want a compact camera that produces great quality photos without the hassle of changing lenses, there are plenty of choices available for every budget. Read on to find out which portable enthusiast compacts are our favorites.

Whether you're hitting the beach in the Northern Hemisphere or the ski slopes in the Southern, a rugged compact camera makes a great companion. In this buying guide we've taken a look at nine current models and chosen our favorites.

What's the best camera for under $500? These entry level cameras should be easy to use, offer good image quality and easily connect with a smartphone for sharing. In this buying guide we've rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing less than $500 and recommended the best.

If you're looking for a high-quality camera, you don't need to spend a ton of cash, nor do you need to buy the latest and greatest new product on the market. In our latest buying guide we've selected some cameras that while they're a bit older, still offer a lot of bang for the buck.

Whether you're new to the Micro Four Thirds system or a seasoned veteran, there are plenty of lenses available for you. We've used pretty much all of them, and in this guide we're giving your our recommendations for the best MFT lenses for various situations.

Blackmagic has announced an update to Blackmagic RAW that adds support, via plugins, to Adobe Premiere Pro and Avid Media Composer. Blackmagic also announced a pair of Video Assist 12G monitor-recorders with brighter HDR displays, USB-C recording and more.

Sony has announced the impending arrival of its next-generation video camera system, the FX9. The full-frame E-mount system is set to be released later this year with a 16-35mm E-mount lens to follow in spring 2020.

The Canon G5 X Mark II earns a Silver Award with its very good image quality, flexibility and the overall engaging experience of using the camera. However, if you need the very best in autofocus and video, other options may suit you better. Find out all the details in our full G5 X II review.

The Fujifilm X-A7 is the newest addition to the company's X-series lineup. Despite its relatively low price of $700 (with lens), Fujifilm didn't skimp on features. Click through to find out what you need to know about the X-A7.

The entry-level Fujifilm X-A7 improves upon many of its predecessor's weak points, including a zippier processor, an upgraded user experience and 4K/30p video capture. It goes on sale October 24th for $700 with a 15-45mm F3.5-5.6 kit lens.

Robert Frank's unconventional approach to photography and filmmaking defied generational constraints and inspired some of the most influential artists of the 20th century. He passed away today at age 94.

All three devices offer a standard 12MP camera plus, for the first time on an iPhone, an ultra-wide 13mm camera module. The 11 Pro and 11 Pro Max also retain the telephoto camera of previous generations.

Phase One's new XT camera system incorporates the company's IQ4 series of digital backs with up to 151MP of resolution and marries them to a line of Rodenstock lenses using the new XT camera body. The result is an impressively small package for one of the largest image sensors currently on the market - take a closer look here.

Phase One has announced its new XT camera system, which includes an IQ4 digital back, body (made up of a shutter release button and two dials) and a trio of Rodenstock lenses. The company is marketing the XT as a 'travel-friendly' product for landscape photographers.